Assembly rejects motion to halt Telephone Hill demolition plan; debate centers on cost, density and demolition timing
Loading...
Summary
Assembly voted down a motion to cancel a proposed $5 million demolition of Telephone Hill and instead explore incremental infill. Members debated developer incentives, hazardous‑material disposal costs, and whether demolition should wait for RFQ responses; the amendment to delay demolition until after RFQ issuance also failed.
The Committee of the Whole spent significant time on Telephone Hill redevelopment options and an upcoming request for qualifications (RFQ).
City staff reported one occupied property remains on site until Feb. 28 and that demolition bid plans will be ready thereafter. A hazardous materials assessment in the packet showed thresholds requiring special disposal; staff said hazardous disposal could account for roughly one‑third of the demolition cost. Manager Kester confirmed CBJ has appropriated $5,800,000 for Telephone Hill and has spent just over $500,000 to advance design and procurement.
Staff presented developer outreach findings recommending a flexible RFQ (Request for Qualifications) that emphasizes performance and incentives; suggested incentives included a nominal or deferred land sale, tax abatement up to a 12‑year period, and use of Affordable Housing Fund dollars (grants or loans). Staff also noted that demolition need not be the only path and that some respondents may propose mixed‑use, infill or partial preservation options.
Assemblymember Brooks moved that the city not spend $5,000,000 on wholesale demolition and instead direct staff to investigate land sales and incremental infill. Several members objected; an amendment to delay demolition until after issuing the RFQ (and to preserve flexibility) failed on roll call (2 yays, 5 nays). The main motion also failed on roll call (2 yays, 5 nays), leaving staff authorized to proceed with demolition bid preparations as previously directed.
During debate members discussed density targets for the RFQ (a range of ~100–150 units was discussed but members also favored keeping the RFQ flexible to allow mixed use and parking plans), the desirability of offering land at a nominal price or deferred sale, whether CBJ should pay demolition costs or wait for developer proposals that might preserve some structures, and the cost‑tradeoffs between achieving high density and minimizing city subsidy.
Next steps: staff will issue demolition bid documents once the last occupancy is cleared, finalize the RFQ based on Assembly guidance (prioritizing housing, affordability and flexibility), and return with final RFQ language and procurement materials.
